- (1.) This order will dispose of R.S.A. No. 1940 of 1976 and R.S.A. No. 1941 of 1976, as the same arise out of one and the same judgment.
(2.) The question for consideration in both the appeals is as to whether the tenancy created by the mortgagee in favour of the appellants, during the pendency of mortgage, continued in existence after the redemption of the mortgage regarding the shops situated in an urban area where the provisions of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, (hereinafter called the Act), were applicable and whether the mortgagor was entitled to possession from such tenants after the redemption. In order to appreciate the controversy, the facts in brief, may be narrated as follows.
(3.) The shops, in dispute, situated in Ferozepur City were mortgaged by Ram Chand and Jagan Nath in favour of Maghi Ram for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- through a mortgage deed dated November 6, 1945. Though the mortgage was with possession, yet the mortgagors executed a rent deed in favour of the mortgagee and remained in actual physical possession agreeing to pay monthly rent at the rate of Rs. 53 and two annas. After the death of the original mortgagors, the plaintiff-respondent (hereinafter called the mortgagors) succeeded to the suit property. After the death of the mortgagee, the mortgagee right in the property were inherited by defendants Nos. 1 to 7, now respondents (hereinafter called the mortgagees). The mortgagees filed an application under section 13 of the Act, against the mortgagors and succeeded in obtaining the order of eviction. The appeal by the mortgagors was also rejected. Thereafter the mortgagees leased out the suit property to defendants Nos. 8 to 10 (now appellants).;